Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has called for a reconsideration of the precedent established in 1977 that allows advocacy groups, trade associations, and other organizations to bring court challenges on behalf of their members. This call was made in his concurring opinion in the recent case of FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, which involved the mifepristone decision. Thomas's opinion targets the Court's third-party or associational standing doctrine, which has historically enabled organizations like the NAACP to sue on behalf of their members. His stance has raised concerns about the future of abortion rights and civil rights suits. One of the most disturbing elements in the Supreme Court’s mifepristone decision is Clarence Thomas’s gratuitous concurring opinion that he wants to eliminate “associational standing” for organizations like the NAACP to be able to sue for their members.
Justice Clarence Thomas called on SCOTUS to reconsider a precedent established in 1977 that has allowed advocacy groups, trade associations and other organizations to routinely bring court challenges to government policies on behalf of their members https://t.co/jymeajeRXm https://t.co/KV8Uv3tokf
🔵 SUPREME COURT'S THOMAS QUESTIONS ABILITY OF GROUPS TO CHALLENGE US LAWS Conservative Justice Clarence Thomas called on the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday to reconsider a precedent established in 1977 that has allowed advocacy groups, trade associations and other… https://t.co/MeRRBAMn6z
Clarence Thomas threw a huge stink bomb into the mifepristone case to upend future abortion rights and civil rights suits. https://t.co/WMiWlWK79o
This thread breaks WHY Clarence Thomas wrote a concurrence in the mife case, and what he's driving at. https://t.co/ex4wO4vpoC
The Thomas concurrence in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine is ... something. A 🧵 In his concurrence, Thomas takes aim at the Court's third party/associational standing doctrine. What is this doctrine?
One of the most disturbing elements in the Supreme Court’s mifepristone decision is Clarence Thomas’s gratuitous concurring opinion that he wants to eliminate “associational standing” for organizations like the NAACP to be able to sue for their members. https://t.co/Y5uqU72HbL https://t.co/TeW3p55HLV